tv Politics Nation MSNBC November 13, 2012 3:00pm-4:00pm PST
watch, listen, enjoy life in this country. you have four years traveling the world. kick back and enjoy this country. i wish her well. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "politicsnation" with al sharpton starts right now. thanks, chris. and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead -- seven days later, and paul ryan still can't handle the truth. one week after president obama crushed the gop, congressman paul ryan returned to his day job on capitol hill today, carrying his own bags, like much of the republican party, he still seems dazed about the national rejection he took. and in an interview he told a local tv station what it felt like to lose. >> what it had become clear to us as things went on, in avirginia and ohio weren't coming together, that it looked to me some time early in the
evening that it just wasn't going to happen. >> and what did that feel like for you? what -- >> it was very disappointing. we had good days, bad days. it was a great experience. i'm very fortunate to have had this experience, but losing never feels good. >> no, losing doesn't feel good. but not learning the lessons of that loss isn't good either. at his core this election was about fairness, giving, everyone a fair shot. congressman ryan doesn't -- he doesn't get it. >> was this a referendum on your budget plan, do you think? >> i don't think we lost it on those budget issues. i think people, especially on medicare, we clearly didn't lose it on those issues. >> they did lose on those issues. budget, taxes, medicare. that's what this election was all about. during the campaign paul ryan himself said so. >> i bet they'll talk about medicare. i'm excited about this debate. we want this debate. we need this debate and we're going to win this debate about
medicare. >> we are offering big ideas. we are offering real solutions, real reforms for a real recovery. >> this is a debate we want to have. this is a debate we need to have. and this is a debate we're going to win. >> the country did have the debate and republicans lost in every battleground except one. today we saw what losing looks like. gop senate majority leader mitch mcconnell sat down with the three new republicans in the senate. they were expecting a big wave. maybe even a new majority in the senate. instead, it was the democrats, the party of obama, that gained seats. so, why do republicans think they lost? here's what paul ryan's attempt at answering that was. >> i think the surprise was some of the turnout. some of the turnout especially in urban areas, which definitely gave president obama the big margin to win this race.
>> urban areas? the president won because of urban areas. sure, turnout was a factor. but sadly paul ryan can't see was so much more to why the republican party failed. one week ago tonight. joining me is congressman barney frank, democrat from massachusetts, ranking and former chairman of the financial services committee. mr. chairman, thank you for joining me. >> thank you, al. >> given the election loss, do you think the republicans will be more open to compromising with the president and the democrats on taxes? let's start there. >> some will. this is going to be a struggle. there are clearly republicans who understand that it was their original right wing policies, the tea party domination, that turned off an awful lot of voters, both on substance and in the way they acted. and the question is whether they'll have the courage of their convictions. speaker boehner appears to be
torn by this. mitch mcconnell, on the other hand, appears to be concerned about winning a primary in kentucky. i can only recall his tactics that tried to mug the president, apparently, will continue. so this is a very interesting question. there are clearly people within the republican party who don't want them to be more flexible, who want to go down in flames. and that's the key issue. there are republicans who will be running for re-election for the senate next time pp, republican members of the house who understand they've got to be more flexible. and it's going to be interesting to watch. i hope they will fine the courage to break with the tea party. to date i'm not encouraged. to date the tea party continues to have that veto. >> now, compare this aftermath of an election with 2010, after the midterm election. what is the difference in terms of the political landscape and leverage of the democratic party?
>> well, clearly the democratic message won. let me point out one issue, which i'm very pleased to see. mitt romney made a big issue out of military spending. he insisted we had to increase military spending. president obama was the first candidate of present who i can remember who correctly and forthrightly said, no, we don't have to spend so much. we can pull back some of that money as things recede. there is a mandate to do that. it's very clear paul ryan and mitt romney, deficit reduction is not their goal. if deficit reduction is your primary goal, you raise some taxes, cut the military and make other cuts. all they want to do is cut programs that affect the quality of life at home. in other words, they are using deficit reduction as a club with which to beat up domestic programs. but you have the big win in the senate. while we gain some seats in the house, if it hadn't been for redistricting, we would have gained more. i don't think we would have quite taken over. i said that but i was wrong.
by every measure we won. that's the president who talked about raising tax on the rich, who said we're going to curtail military spending, who said we've got to have some domestic spending for important issues. you know, these people say, oh, well, it was too narrow. george bush won by a popular margin of minus 500,000. in 2000 george bush lost the popular vote. that's with ralph nader pulling 2.5 million votes away from us. so, what you got then was, i don't them saying, oh, wait a minute, the country's divided, slow down. the republicans had control. they won, i think, they didn't really win, but the supreme court said they did. they went right through with wars and tax cuts. i'm not saying we should run rough shod but with that large electoral vote, with every swing state except one going with us, with every contested senate rate but one going with us, clearly that's a mandate to raise taxes on the wealthy, keep military spending on the downward path
and do other things but in a balanced way. >> now, paul ryan says this was not a referendum on his budget. in fact, he says that the president won because of a large turnout in the urban vote. there was a large turnout. but if you look at the obama coalition, women 18 to 44 years old, asians, latinos, black, catholics, moderates, income less than $50,000, this was the coalition, not just urban -- >> oh, absolutely. >> let me ask you this, congressman, you have worked in the congressman with paul ryan there. what do you say will be ryan's posture going in? what is ryan like to work with. do you think this will change him, humble him or dig in and have another confrontation with the president? >> paul ryan is a very pleasant man, but a very rigid one. and it's clear to me, he is for
higher military spending, he is for keeping taxes low on the wealthiest people. he's trying to undo the legacy of domestic programs to improve the quality of life. i expect him to continue to do that. i do have to comment on this very strange complaint. apparently his complaint is that people voted. and people voted who were the kind of people who weren't supposed to vote. they tried to do voter suppression. this notion, oh, my god, we lost because people voted. it's a little like complaining, you know, we lost that ball game because the other team got too many runs. i mean, it literally makes no sense to complain you lost because people voted. that's what people are supposed to do. it does reveal their mentality, which is those people, those urban people. they're not supposed to vote. we can count on them not voting. they tried also, of course, to suppress the vote. when people rejected that and went out and exercised their rights ads citizens, they're shocked. >> they tried all kinds of tactics.
they probably woke up a sleeping giant, so i'm glad in that sense they understand that. chairman frank, thank you so much for your time tonight. >> my pleasure, al. tonight president obama today met with labor leaders and other progressives at the white house, chatting away forward for his second term. "the huffington post" reports the president told them he was, quote, not going to budge when it comes to the bush tax cuts for the rich. joining me now is michelle carter, washington correspondent for "newsweek" and the daily beast and alicia menendez, host and producer for huff post live. thank you for joining me. >> hey, rev. >> hi. >> is the president going to hold the line on these tax cuts for the rich? >> the progressive community is determined to keep him strong on this. and they are very heartened by what they've heard so far. he said he needs to take the message to the people more. he's in a much better bargaining position than he was before the
election. i mean, this fiscal cliff, the republicans do not want to go over this. if they do, their priorities are going to get hit. military spending and all those bush tax cuts go away automatically. the president has them in a much better position for where he wants them. and i think he'll probably be pretty tough on this. >> alicia, will he hold steadfast? i mean, clearly progressives are in a much stronger place than they were and republicans are much weaker now. >> yeah, no, i think that he will hold the line. i don't think you would have heard those leaders coming out of that meeting talking the way they were talking, about how confident they are about him holding the line. he's in a better position and progressives are better -- in a better position to hold the line on this. i think the secondary conversation that comes out of it is the ratio of spending cuts to new revenue. i think that's something also that progressive leaders came out of that meeting feeling good about. so, you're right, he's in a stronger position. part that's not just the electoral support he received but all these exit polls showing
that americans agree with him on a whole host of issues. whether that be this, whether or not we return the bush era tax cuts or whether it be something like immigration. so, he has not only the electoral support but he has the support of the american pop you louse populous in a whole host of issues. >> in a second term, a host of progressive items that can possibly be looked at with some hope of moving forward, climate change, immigration, voting reform, tax reform, deficit reduction, alternative energy. and as alicia said, many of them not only were central in the campaign and people voted for the president, some of them that were not central in the campaign when polled, americans seem to be going that way. are we seeing the second term the president obama bring in more of progressive policies than we've seen in a long time? >> i think he thinks he has a
mandate and certainly the progressive message did very well on election day. i do think immigration is one area where republicans are very nervous and they would do very well to kind of step up and start working on comprehensive reform. otherwise they're going to have a lot more elections like this one, where they are just getting throttled on that issue in the latino community. but also as we talk about the budget's going to be addressed, obama care now is not going to be on the table like it was last time around. and a lot more wiggle room on issues like, you know, climate change and jobs and stuff like that for the the president to maneuver. >> alicia, what do you feel is the progressive agenda that needs to be pushed through? what would be the priority of items you would push through? >> i get to push through? i like this game. i mean, number one for me, immigration reform. and i think you saw a mandate coming out of this election for it. reverend, these numbers have not changed. the public has been on the right side of this issue for years.
over 60% supporting not just comprehensive reform, but an earned path to citizenship for all of these people who live in the united states. 12 million people, two-thirds of them have been here more than a decade. they consider themselves americans. americans are on the right side of this issue. we have legislation that was drafted as early as 2006-2007 that we had bipartisan support on. i mean, there's an actual framework that you could bring to the table right now. and if you brought back the republicans who defected, just a year or two ago, then you would have enough support to actually put something together and pass it through. so, you know what, let's do it. let's not take the year it took to do health care reform. let's put it on the table and let's get it done. i think that's an excellent priority for this second term. >> michelle, how does latinos, for example, trust the gop coming to them with immigration reform unless they confront
those tea party types and far right that have been so conservative and reactionary in this area without them really standing up and dealing with them and their party, how can they trust anything that's said about immigration reform by this party? >> i don't think they're going to be able to trust anything that's said. they're going to have to watch and see what's going to come out of the congress. if the congress over the objection, as you say, of a lot of the more kind of right wing elements in the party can come up with some comprehensive nonpunitive reform that seriously addresses things like the dream act and doesn't just kind of politicize this issue, then they can start the process toward healing this rift. if all they're going to do is talk, i don't think anybody's going to trust them. it's going to take serious legislative work before anybody will listen to them at all. >> michele cotter, alicia menendez, thank you for your time. one week later and the republicans are still fighting. but their problem is, they're
fighting each other. it's game on. rush limbaugh against the establishment. plus, after the landslide victory, thousands of right-wingers are showing their true colors. americans in more than 30 states want to secede. how will the white house respond? you're watching "politicsnation" on msnbc. having you ship my gifts couldn't be easier. well, having a ton of locations doesn't hurt. and my daughter loves the santa. oh, ah sir. that is a customer. let's not tell mom. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. fedex office.
from jammin' jerk chicken, to creamy gouda bisque. see what's new from campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. then don't get nickle and dimed by high cost investments and annoying account fees. at e-trade, our free easy-to-use online tools and experienced retirement specialists can help you build a personalized plan. and with our no annual fee iras and a wide range of low cost investments, you can execute the plan you want at a low cost. so meet with us, or go to etrade.com for a great retirement plan with low cost investments. ♪
welcome back. today we learned another general has been caught up in the investigation that led to the resignation of cia director david petraeus. general john allen is the top u.s. commander in afghanistan. officials are investigating him for, quote, inappropriate communication with jill kel kelley. she's the woman that got the petraeus investigation started. the pentagon is looking at more than 20,000 pages of documents and e-mails between kelley and general allen. 20,000. officials tell the ap that some of the material was, quote,
flirtatious. general allen denies having an affair with kelley, who we know was also friends with general petraeus. joining me now is michael isikoff, national investigative correspondent for nbc news. he's been breaking some of the big details on this case over the last few days. michael, first, thanks for being here tonight. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> now, let me ask, general allen is now under investigation for his relationship with jill kelley. what can you tell us about the relationship and what can you tell us about miss kelley. >> we should say we don't know for sure. as you pointed out, the e-mails, these voluminous -- apparently voluminous e-mails describe a relationship or -- that appear to be flirtatious but, you know, potentially inappropriate is the word that was first used by the pentagon. but whether it goes more than that, we don't know. we do know that at least one
woman, paula broadwell, appeared to believe there was something there because she's the one that started out these anonymous threatening e-mails which i should remind you, start out not referencing jill kelley's relationship with general petraeus with other generals at u.s. central command and special operations command in tampa. now, we should remember that general allen, before being the commander of all u.s. troops and nato troops in afghanistan was the deputy commander at the u.s. central command. so, the presumption would be that it was kelley's relationship with general allen, whatever that was, that set paula broadwell off and led her to begin these anonymous e-mails.
>> what was it, 20,000 pages of e-mails? i mean, what kind of issue could it have been, then? >> you know, the 20,000 could be a little misleading. that's 20,000 doumencuments in l printed out. there may have been extensive attachments to these e-mails that could have been hundreds of pages. until we see them, you know, it's hard to make a firm judgment. we're expecting a statement from jill kelley's lawyers and communications advisers this evening in which she, i can presume, is directly going to address this. she's already denied there was any inappropriate relationship with general petraeus. so, i don't want to be too hasty in rushing for judgment, but we should point out that there are some very odd things going on here beyond the voluminous
e-mail correspondence. we learned about general petraeus and general allen writing letters in a -- to a d.c. judge on behalf of jill kelley's sister, who's involved in a very nasty child custody case. this was just two months ago. september -- >> so just two months ago -- >> just two months ago, while the fbi investigation was going on, both general petraeus and cia director and general allen and as commander of u.s. forces in afghanistan, within two days of each other, write letters vouching for the sister of jill kelley saying she deserves more time with her son. a judge had placed very strict limits on her visitation with her own son after awarding custody to her ex-husband. the judge had found -- the judge had found, and i quote, that jill kelley's sister has extreme
personal deficits in the areas of honesty and integrity. that was in a court ruling in november of 2011. and then in september of 2012 the director of the cia is writing a letter vouching for -- >> so, the judge has this assessment of jill's -- >> jill kelley's sister. >> right, right. >> and then general petraeus, as districter of the cia and general allen both wrote letters this past september on behalf of this sister as a favor to jill kelley? >> well, we can presume as a favor to jill kelley, general petraeus, then-cia director petraeus referenced spending time with the sister and her son, young son, while the kelley family, including jill kelley, was visiting with him over christmas, at a christmas dinner
at the petraeus home. so, clearly there was a very close relationship there between the kelleys and the petraeuses. >> how does this woman, jill kelley, get to close to all these generals? >> well, you know, that is one of the big unanswered questions here. she clearly had a lot of access to a lot of high-level people in the tampa area. she lived within a mile of central command and special operations command are located. she made a point of volunteering for events and being very social and friendly with a lot of high-level people in the government, high-level generals in that area. >> michael isikoff, we'll be following this, of course, with your help. thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you. coming up, who next to go
under the republican bus? they're all pointing fingers at each other. wait until you hear what one very prominent republican is calling his party today. and one week later, pat robertson and the religious right is still reeling from the big loss. is the evangelical influence on politics over? [ male announcer ] this is joe woods' first day of work.
cook what you love, and save your money. joe doesn't know it yet, but he'll work his way up from busser to waiter to chef before opening a restaurant specializing in fish and game from the great northwest. he'll start investing early, he'll find some good people to help guide him, and he'll set money aside from his first day of work to his last, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade.
have you joined the "politicsnation" conversation on facebook yet? today we caught this glimpse of u2 lead singer bono meeting with vice president biden at the white house to discuss a host of global issues. ernesto writes, two great humanitarians. knowing the vice president's love of sunglasses, mary joked that mr. biden wants a pair of those glasses that bono wears. we want to hear what you think, too. please head over to facebook and search "politicsnation" and "like" us to join the conversation that keeps going long after the show ends. ... what should we invest in? maybe new buildings? what about updated equipment? they can help, but recent research shows... ... nothing transforms schools like investing in advanced teacher education. let's build a strong foundation.
let's invest in our teachers so they can inspire our students. let's solve this. a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left. i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem, that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce the risk of an afib-related stroke. there is limited data on how these drugs compare when warfarin is well managed. no routine blood monitoring means bob can spend his extra time however he likes.
new zealand! xarelto® is just one pill a day, taken with the evening meal. and with no dietary restrictions, bob can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto® rivaroxaban without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. stopping may increase your risk of having a stroke. get medical help right away if you develop any signs or symptoms of bleeding, like unusual bruising or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you currently have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto®, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver or bleeding problems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®.
for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com. how they'll live tomorrow. for more than 116 years, ameriprise financial has worked for their clients' futures. helping millions of americans retire on their terms. when they want. where they want. doing what they want. ameriprise. the strength of a leader in retirement planning. the heart of 10,000 advisors working with you one-to-one. together for your future. ♪ if you thought the gop blame game was over, think again. they're just getting started. after getting slammed by the gop establishment for pushing mitt romney so far to the right, rush
limbaugh responds. fasten your seat belt, folks, here comes the gop crackup. >> just as i predicted, ladies and gentlemen. wait until you hear the sound bites. this election was lost because of your host, rush limbaugh. i am the primary reason. there are others, but i'm the primary reason the republican party -- and i'm, by the way, the primary reason the republican party will keep losing. until i am denounced. >> i sense a hint of sarcasm. well, maybe fox news contributor dick morris will take some responsibility. he is the one who hyped a landslide victory for mitt romney. >> dick, i got to tell you something, people are furious with you right now. you probably know it. >> well, i'm not sure that -- i don't know that they're furious with me.
i hope they're not. i called it as i saw it from the polling. >> not my fault. it was the polls. how about shawn hannity throwing him right under the bus. but let's see what a republican poster has to say. >> the published polls that the romney campaign and the republican establishment were trashing day after day turned out to be accurate. and to miss so many states and to be this far off, your fox news viewers out to be outraged. >> now, that's a new one. a republican pollster who's outraged by the republican polls. everyone's pointing fingers. the tea party are blaming the establishment, saying mitt romney was too moderate. and ronald reagan's son says there just wasn't enough reagan. >> i got to tell you, the republican party may talk about ronald reagan but they haven't really embraced ronald reagan.
>> somehow i don't think he hit the nail on the head. but louisiana governor bobby jindal might be onto something. he says the republicans need to stop being the stupid party. wow, the stupid party. there is a war inside the gop and nobody knows how this will end. joining me now, steve kornacki and krystal ball, co-hosts of "the cycle" on msnbc. >> our guys, the upper echelon of the republican party, want to fashion themselves as members of the ruling class. we the country class are not in the ruling class. we're in a problem. >> steve, limbaugh is pointing to a big split in the party. where do you think this is going? is this a fight we're going to see rush and the establishment have? >> yeah. this is the problem for the republican party. that kind of a fight is probably
good for rush limbaugh in terms of it gives him something to talk about, gives him status within the conservative movement. and it really allows him to rile up his audience, his base and say, i'm the voice of the pure conservative. it's this sellouts in the party establishment who were trying to get us to fold on our principles on what we believe on. rush throughout his career, he can go back two deck as and see them fighting george bush sr. on tax increases. he's done well defining himself as the voice of the pure party base. the party base likes hearing that, too. the problem for the republican party, there are sort of voices in what he called the ruling class who sense from this election there needs to be shifts in this party, need to change their demographic outreach a little bit. but a guy like rush limbaugh doesn't have much incentive to go along. he'll do fine the way it is. >> he's a real man of the people, reverend. >> of course. but as a man of the people, he has some backing from tea party types, "the los angeles times" says that the tea party, the anger that limbaugh has is
backed by the tea party for conservatives. one emotion seems to dominate all others. a white hot anger at the republican establishment. tea party supporters are angry at gop for embracing as presidential nominee a moderate n quotes, like romney for undermining true conservative candidates and for choosing to ignore the conservative agenda. but on the other hand, bobby jindal is calling saying that we've got to stop being the stupid party, the republican party. i mean, are we seeing a real fight here, a real split, jindal calling them the stupid party, limbaugh saying let's dig in and fight the establishment? >> absolutely. you'll recall after 2008, you know, you think there would be a lesson taken from there that republicans needed to move more to the center, the country was moving away from them. they learned the exact opposite lesson. the lesson taken away there was
john mccain was too moderate. our principles weren't on the ballot. they got some validation in 2010 when the tea party took over the republican party and used fear, hatred and anger to ride to a midterm electoral win. in a presidential year when the whole country is turning out it's a different matter. the problem for the republican party is as the establishment says, we are to come back to the center, where the country is, back to policies that make sense to people, is they've spent so long using that fear, riding that fear, that hatred, that, you know, that fear of the other, to electoral wins that they've trained their base that this is where they need to be. so, it's going to be very hard, republican members of congress are going to be looking over their shoulder, wondering if they're going to be primaried by a tea party group, and it's going to be hard for -- they will have to be politically courageous, something they're not good at doing, to come back to the center. >> now, steve, the base, where
is the base? because if the base is the tea partyers, wouldn't they in some ways resent saying, well, wait a minute, 2010 we delivered the house of representatives to you guys, unprecedented, historical amount of seats, and now because you give us a moderate, all of a sudden that's thrown out the window? doesn't this have the making of a real clash that won't heal any time soon? >> no, not to encourage that. but two different interpretations i'm hearing from republicans of this election. are you hearing republicans saying, yeah, we lost. yeah, there's a message here for our party. but then i saw newt gingrich say this morning, on "morning joe," newt gingrich said, no, the lesson here is the republican house got re-elected. republicans had control of the house before this election. they still have control of it now. he's saying, think about the principles the house of republicans stood for in 2010, 2011, 2012. you need to continue holding fast to that.
that sets up this clash. you look at like the deal that will eventually probably be cut, you know, on the fiscal cliff, fiscal slope, whatever you want to call it. republicans in washington talking about the first time being open to tax increases. try selling that to republicans in the house who are in safe republican districts who don't think they've done anything wrong the last couple of years. >> at the same time, you have newt on "morning joe" talking about the principles that got them in. last night you had huckabee on the daley show that younger people like i and krystal watch -- >> it's on past my bedtime. >> he was saying, they out to reach out more to minorities. >> he's right but the problem is you can't just reach out to minorities. you have to have policies that make sense. they also have a problem with tone. you know, bill o'reilly came out after this election and basically said, minorities voted for obama because they wanted stuff. if your party is saying things
like that and no one is calling it out, how successful -- >> but huckabee. let me show you what he said and give you the interesting point on that. >> i think it's ridiculous for republicans to assume, we're not going to get that vote. it's automatic for the democrats. that's just not true. i think the fact is, republicans have done a pathetic job of communicating what conservativism does to empower people and how it helps people to move from one rung of the ladder to the next. >> see, it's all message and not substance. huckabee, when he was governor much of arkansas got 50% of the black vote once. as a republican. >> yeah, but we haven't seen that at the national level. we haven't seen a republican get more than 20% -- >> or a state level. >> since 1964 is the last time you go -- 1960 is the last time you go more than 20% of the black vote. the republican party, so much of the rhetoric coming out of national republicans and conservatives for the last four years has really, you know, subtly in some cases and not so
sulgtly in other cases, but has been built around race in a way that alienates black voters, hispanic voters. you just saw that. >> steve kornacki and krystal ball, thank you for your time tonight. catch them on "the cycle" weekdays at 3 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. ahead, they are among the biggest losers of all. what the big election fail means for the right wing religious movement in this country. and the gop fringe rises again. the move to secede from the usa is back. are they serious? you bet they are. we'll get at that coming up. stay with us. [ male announcer ] it's that time of year again. time for citi price rewind. because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and if it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card
still election day in arizona. as of last night, there were still 215,000 uncounted early and provisional ballots in maricopa county. grass roots groups have been protesting at the county recorder's office every day the votes go uncounted. one group, adios registered more than 34,000 new and mostly hispanic voters. they hope to oust maricopa county sheriff joe arpioa, but
when the new voters tried to exercise their rights, they said they were incorrectly told to vote by provisional ballot. >> people said i voted in that precinct two years ago. i voted here in the primary. they're not in the book. the county did not do a very good job of taking care of the addresses. it should have already been in the computer. it should have already been processed. it should have been in our roster. i think the county will have a lot to look for in their investigation as to why there were too many, so many provisionals. not just in our precinct, but countywide, statewide. >> some immigrant rights groups are worried those provisionals may never be counted. they're calling on the justice department to investigate. i agree. there should be an investigation. there is no good reason for it to take this long for votes to be counted. it's time for real voter reform.
[ thunder crashes ] [ female announcer ] some people like to pretend a flood could never happen to them. and that their homeowners insurance protects them. [ thunder crashes ] it doesn't. stop pretending. only flood insurance covers floods. ♪ visit floodsmart.gov/pretend to learn your risk. till you finish your vegetables. [ clock ticking ] [ male announcer ] there's a better way... v8 v-fusion. vegetable nutrition they need, fruit taste they love. could've had a v8. or...try kids boxes!
one week later and they're still reeling. the religious right is trying to figure out what went so wrong. how could they have laos like this? for 30 years evangelicals have been a force in the republican party. the evangelical explosion came in 1980 when millions helped ronald reagan win the presidency. preachers like reverend jerry fallwell and pat robertson rose to national prominence. the religious right was credited for helping george w. bush win in 2004, with 79% of the evangelical vote. the atlantic writes about the end of evangelical dominance in politics but points out 79% of white evangelicals voted for romney on tuesday. the evangelical vote was 27% of the overall electorate, the highest it's ever been in an election. but guess what?
it didn't matter. america rejected the culture wars. america rejected the religious rights agendas on issues after issue. abortion, gay marriage, rejected. is it the end of the evangelical force in politics? joining me now is frank schaeffer, columnist for "the huffington post," also author of "crazy for god." frank, thanks for being here tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> now, let me ask you, do you think the religious right poses a real problem for the gop? >> yeah, you know, before the election, not after, but before the election i wrote an op-ed for an evangelical progressive group called patheos.com, and they are open to liberal ideas. and i wrote a piece called how the evangelicals have doomed the
gop party. it was the evangelical party perhaps more than any single element in the last election cycle that peeled off so many voters who were just tired of the extremism, the masogony, the anti-woman platform, anti-abortion platform which many evangelicals hold as right wing tea party, many of these things. just as i trace in my book "crazy for god" the evangelicals have dug themselves a very deep pit they can't negotiate out of. in the last election cycle they were held by the right wing roman catholic bishops who inexplicably threw their hat in the ring with republicans overtly saying obama was, as you remember, reverend, because we did a program about this -- >> yes, we did. >> -- anti-religious. they called him anti-religious. the roman catholic bishops, evangelicals are totally ineffective and can the republican party move past that? not on your life. >> let me show you some reaction
of evangelical leaders on the right to the president's re-election. >> what have they got? he doesn't seem to have any program yet he's not able to win re-election. what is going on with the american people? >> i think this was an evangelical disaster. >> romney was pro life, pro family, but i don't think we engaged in the ad war on those issues. i think if we would have engaged instead of being forced to be on the defensive, i still think we would have gotten many, many more of what used to be call the reagan democrats, catholics and others who are pro life and pro family. but may identify more with the democrats on economic issues, but with republicans and conservatives on values issues. >> so, frank, when you hear gary bower talking like that, pat robertson, it doesn't sound like they've given up. and if they are not given up, if they're digging in, that could be a problem for moderate republicans that want to recapture the party.
>> well, it will be a huge problem for two reasons. one, theological and ideological. these guys can't budge because this is part of their faith. they've included in their faith now the kind of karl rove agenda of big business and corporate america and capitalism. so, they're totally stuck. but i want to say something else. there are republican agitators and extremists like ralph reed, who are now also in it just for the money. look, he claimed he got $11 million. you can be sure he took a nice, big cut off the top of that to get out the evangelical vote. like karl rove, who will keep coming back like a bad lunch, they aren't going to go away. why? because there's big money in sucker-punching evangelicals into thinking you can deliver a vote for them. how do i know that? as i talk about in my book "crazy for god" i was one of those guys 30 years ago, raising millions of dollars from people like rich, who founded amway, promising him we could change
america, bring it back to conservative values, blah, blah, blah, blah. since i've been there and done that, and had the good fortune to bail when i was young enough to start a new life, i understand how tempting the money is to keep sucker these evangelical votes along. >> so is this -- >> it's about money. the leadership, it is. karl rove, ralph reed, mike h k huckabee, they earn a lot of money off pushing this agenda and saying you give us donations, millionaires or 25 bucks a pop and we'll deliver the vote. they have failed misserably and they'll take the republican party down with them. which is not good for the country. i'm overvoied one of the best presidents that's ever been elected in this country was just re-elected. still in the long term we need two vibrant political parties. these ivevangelicals are like cancer. they'll take down republicans with them. they may even peel off into a third party if they can't get their way.
then that will be -- our system will teeter for a while until we readjust. >> frank, thanks for your time tonight. >> thanks for having me on. >> a week ago millions of americans celebrated president obama's victory. since then, thousands of right-wingers are threatening to secede from the usa. you bet they're serious. my commentary next. ♪
constipated? yeah. mm. some laxatives like dulcolax can cause cramps. but phillips' caplets don't. they have magnesium. for effective relief of occasional constipation. thanks. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. and we got onesies. sometimes miracles get messy. so we use tide free. no perfumes or dyes for her delicate skin. brad. not it. not it. just kidding. that's our tide. what's yours? [ male announcer ] it started long ago. the joy of giving something everything you've got. it takes passion.
and it's not letting up anytime soon. at unitedhealthcare insurance company, we understand that commitment. and always have. so does aarp, an organization serving the needs of americans 50 and over for generations. so it's no surprise millions have chosen an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they help cover some of the expenses medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs. to find out more, request your free decision guide. call or go online today. after all, when you're going the distance, it's nice to have the experience and commitment to go along with you. keep dreaming. keep doing. go long. is a thrilling, dual-flavored ride to mouth fun-town. but it's not like everyone is going to break into a karaoke jam session. ♪ this will literally probably never happen.
up high! ok. don't you have any usefull apps on that thing? who do you think i am, quicken loans? ♪ at quicken loans, our amazingly useful mortgage calculator app allows you to quickly calculate your mortgage payment based on today's incredibly low interest rates... right from your iphone or android smartphone. one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. ♪ there's a new trend among right wing sore losers. in the last week americans in at least 40 states started petitions to the white house to secede from the union. the texas petition has more than 82,000 signatures. now, we could just dismiss this
as sour grapes. claiming you want to break up the country just because you disagree with some of the president's policies? it isn't funny. and this isn't the first time we've seen the right talk about secession in years. back in 2009 texas governor rick perry hinted he would support secessi secession. this time he says nothing should change our great union. it fits in the republican party's loose talk. they take any opportunity they can to undermine the president. but after his resounding victory across the country, it just shows how frustrated the tea party and the right wing are and are grasping at anything they can. you can't love the country only when you win. i remember how angry many of us i